HOOFED HELPERS By Bjornen dupont Archaeology 377
Horses, mules and other four-legged, hoofed animals, have long been work partners for mankind. Whether it was for transportation, working in the fields, logging trees, carrying mail, or hauling wagons, the strength of these animals was key to many work operations in the past. One, maybe not so obvious, place where these animals were utilized was underground, in mining operations. In the early nineteenth century, mules were in high demand in America for their potential help in agricultural and draught work (Clutton-Brock, 50). Soon mules, horses, oxen, and even dogs were used in mines also, but mules were most common. There are several reasons why a mule would be chosen over a horse. Mules are large boned and very strong, yet they are smaller and more compact than horses. This feature makes them more suitable for the tight, low ceiling mining tunnels. Mules are also characteristically tougher than horses, and are not bothered by extreme work conditions. Mules do not need the quantities of feed that horses need, especially when working. Horses require large amounts of grass or hay along with the normal grain in order to keep from losing weight while under hard working conditions. Mules, on the other hand, can survive mainly on com, with very little roughage to supplement it while under the same conditions. Altogether they are a more practical choice for the rather unnatural conditions for four-legged, hoofed animals living underground. The underground mining system was complex. There were a number of main tunnels into the ground, off of which were many smaller passageways, or rooms, where individual miners worked. In the main tunnels was where the mules
would work. Their main job was to haul the filled coal carts to the surface or " entrance of the mine and return the empty carts to the individual rooms. Within the tunnel system, rails where laid on which wooden and iron carts ran, pulled by /; (Jv~ /'\ " ~~ - "~,..'-'~~ ~;;-_,,_;_,,_~Y\ the mules. Their job was very important in keeping the mining operation running smoothly and as efficiently as possible. Not only did these animals work full days underground, but they spent as much as a few years at a time in the darkness, never seeing the sun. The mine system was set up complete with an underground stable area for the horses, mules or oxen. Mules became a more and more popular addition to the miners list of "necessities", and by the end of the nineteenth century "the coal industry utilized some 25,000 mules and horses, mostly for underground haulage. This contrasted with some 1000 vehicles powered by steam engine, electricity (a new factor at the end of the century), or compressed air" (Long, 40). The mining industry did not begin to be machine oriented until the late I800's when mechanics began to slowly take the place of animals, as well as men, in the mines (in this way more coal could be mined using less miners in a much more efficient way). However, as much as mules were a desired purchase for miners, they were also an expensive one. In 1876 the average cost of a able mule was around onehundred and seventy-five dollars (Long, 40) which in those times was expensive. To that initial cost, blacksmithing bills, and feed had to be added on, as well as IaJL. any problems that may occur naturally, for example health or lameness. The average life-span of a mule is long, but generally they are good for about seven years of vigorous work. Even with the likelihood of seven good years of work with one mule, the regularity of accidents within mines was staggering. Mules, or other animals being used to haul the lump coal, were killed or injured beyond CP
recovery more often than the men working in the mines. This was because most of the accidents occurred when a coal cart got lose and came hurtling back down the tunnels and collided with the upcoming load. This happened frequently, and if the runaway cart was not able to be stopped (by throwing spars, made for that very purpose, into the spokes of the wheels), the human stood a much better chance of getting out of the way of the oncoming vehicle than the mule which was hitched to the cart. The most common mining method was one called undennining. In this method, the miners would chip away coal from the base of the interior wall until they could wedge the area on top and have the whole face come down in goodsized lumps. These coal pieces where then hand loaded into the waiting carts out in the main shaft, and hauled, by the mules, to the entrance of the mine. However, horses and mules were used in other types of mining also, including strip mining, in which they were hitched to scrapers to strip away the earth layers on top of / the coal underneath. Mule drivers had a job of as much importance as the miners himself. On the days when the mule drivers would strike (they were usually young son's of the miners, working their way up the mining ladder, and would strike often), no work could be done within the mines. The job of the mule driver was to ride the carts of lump coal through the passages and stop at each individual miners "room" and pick up his full cart which he would have pushed to the entrance of his shaft. These carts would be added to the train of carts and hauled to the surface. For all of these methods, four-legged, hoofed creatures proved a very necessary part of the mining team. Without them the process would be all but
impossible, with the full carts of coal weighing so much. A couple of mules can haul load after load of heavy coal to the surface, without showing the strain of the heavy work. They are very tough animals, and useful helpers to the mine of ~ / the mines. f
BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Clutton-Brock, Juliet. Horse Power. Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press. 1992. 2. Cohen, Stan. King Coal. Charleston, West VA. 1984. 3. Harvey, Katherine A. The Best-Dressed Miners. lthica, New York. Cornell University Press. 1969. 4. Long, Priscilla. Where the Sun Never Shines. Paragon House, New York. 1989. 5. Foxfire 5. Edited by Eliot Wigginton. Garden City, New York. Anchor Press/Doubleday, I <:r79.
PHOTO#l Structure G Unit 20 Layer 2 This metal horse-shoe is unusual in its size. It is 2 3/4 inches from toe to heel, which is unusually small. The nonnal nail holes are found along each side, rusted over so they don't appear in the photo. It is too small too have come offa horse, but it could have been a small mule or a donkey.
PHOT0#2 Structure G Unit 20 Layer 2 This shoe is much more typical of what you would expect to find. It is about five inches from toe to heel, which is a much more normal length. A regular horse shoe curves all the way from the toe, along the sides, and to the heel, but a mule shoe runs much more straight along the side walls towards the heel. This shoe is a mule shoe, judging by its straight sides. The reason for this feature is so that the shoe runs along the side wall of the hoof and hangs offthe heel slightly, giving the hoofbetter support.
PHOT0#3 Structure G Unit 4 Layer 3 This metal buckle, two inches in length and about an inch and a half in width, looks like a typical girth buckle. It is hard to tell for sure, but it contains the features ofthis type of buckle. A girth will have two ofthese buckles side by side on each end of the girth.
PHOTO #4 Structure I Unit 13 Layer 1 This is a typical horse shoe nail, 2 1/2 inches in length. The difference between a horse shoe nail and a regular nail is that the head of a horse shoe nail is tapered down to the shaft of the nail, instead ofperpendicular to it. This is so that it fits down into the groove made in the shoe and is flush with it when pounded all the way in.
PHOT0#5 Structure I Unit 2 Layer 3 This artifact is not necessarily horse related, but it is likely to have been. It is a I 114 inch buckle, rounded at the top. Itis quite possible that it came off of some sort of tack, for example a buckle from a bridle or halter.
PHOT0#6 Structure C Unit 13 Layer 2 This large meta.i shoe is a very good example ofa work shoe. Itis rusted, but the grooves and nail holes are still well defined. Itis six inches in length and width, and shows the more rounded shape of a horse shoe rather than that of a mule. On the toe ofthe shoe is a curved lip that fit up around the end of the hoof to keep the shoe from sliding. On each heel end are grips, which give considerable traction, showing that this shoe was used in areas where traction may not have been good, such as a mining tunnel.
PHOTO #7 Structure C Unit C Level 2 This artifact is most likely a metal bit. It came out of the ground folded, as shown in the photograph, but unfolded it would be about eight inches in length, which is standard length ofa bil. They range slightly in length due to varying sizes ofthe animals mouth. This is a two part metal snaffle bit, con!iisting oftwo thin metal bars, connected in the middle by a metal ring. There is a hole punched in the ends of the bars which is where the "eggbutt" or "fulkheek" end pieces of the bit would fit.
PHOT0#8 Structure C U~l A Level 2 This metal buckle is very similar to the one in photo 3, probably also a girth buckle. This one is slightly less rusted, so it is a better e"'ample.
,. PHOTO /19 Structure C Unit C Level 3 Once again, this artifact is not defiantly a horse related object, but it is likely that it was. It is a more delicate buckle, which could have ~en used on some type ofharness, or even a bridle.